There are a number of existing methods to embed data into physical environments, including, the non-dynamic visual display of short URLs or text codes, QR codes, bar codes and RFID codes.
Posters and other print media already commonly contain text forms of URLs and/or shortcodes from URL-shortening services such as bit.ly. To use these printed text codes, one has to enter them into a web browser. These text forms require a pen or pencil, or a good memory, to retain the URL. This can be a particular problem for current URL shortening services, such as bit.ly which use difficult to remember alphanumeric strings. There are, however, alternative short coding services which use memorable codes, but it will be appreciated that there may be limited numbers of memorable codes available.
QR codes are a method for representing relatively large amounts of data (1K) in a pictograph. The code includes a header, which indicates what type of encoding the marker contains, and a payload. The code is large enough to encode a full URL or other data payload: for example, small images. The main drawbacks with QR codes include: they are relatively visibly large; the code needs to be seen up close with a camera in order that the code be recognizable; when in low-light or if the camera is moving, the decode step can fail; and the code is not human readable. Nor is it visibly obvious to human beings that two different codes are distinct.
Amongst the commonly printed codes, bar codes are a well-established coding mechanism. The semantics of the code are defined by international standards. There are online services that map the codes to different web resources (e.g. CueCat). However, bar codes share many of the disadvantages of QR codes.
RFID (Radio Frequency IDentification) tags are a way of embedding a code into a physical device that can be carried by a person or attached to an object. The code can be passively read when the RFID is close to a reading terminal. This passive, or semi-passive, code reading is highly attractive in some contexts (e.g. Oyster card), because it is tolerant of user behaviour (for example, the general proximity of the card to the reader is sufficient to facilitate the transaction). However, there are no simple tools for users to create RFID tags, and it requires hardware that is not typically available to consumers.
There are also a number of technologies for data transfer between online devices. For example, an Internet service such as email, twitter, etc., could be used. Some of these services require the user to know the identifier of the receiver. Furthermore, these Internet services require both devices to have been online at some point to confirm that the data transfer has occurred. Therefore, there is no ability to use these services asynchronously. For example, with email, or any other web service, if offline, there is no guarantee that once initiated the data transfer will conclude in the future: the email might get queued, but never sent; or the device might be stolen.
For peer to peer transfer between mobile devices, the most widely promulgated technology is Bluetooth. This is a high-bandwidth channel between two devices. However, there are usability issues and is accordingly widely shunned by users despite being nominally available on many devices. For example, synchronizing pairing of two devices is a haphazard experience, with different devices having different protocols for enabling data transfer.
There is also a growing standard around near-field communications (NFC), which essentially combines the technologies of RFID tag and reader together. The technology is a competitor to Bluetooth. One advantage is that active devices will be able to mimic static RFID tags (e.g. your phone could “mimic” your Oyster card). This means the devices will be able to interact with all existing RFID reading systems, which includes many payment and security access systems. Prototypes for NFC exist, but this technology requires users to get new handsets and devices. At present, few consumer devices with the technology are yet being marketed. It may be 3 to 5 years before NFC reaches any significant market share.
It is an object of the present invention to provide a system for communicating data which overcomes the disadvantages of the prior art, or at least provides a useful alternative.